Amy Gérin-Lajoie, Walter Adame-Gonzalez, Eve-Marie Frigon, Liana Guerra Sanches, Anna Nayouf, Denis Boire, Mahsa Dadar, Josefina Maranzano
{"title":"离体人脑容量测定:核磁共振测量的验证。","authors":"Amy Gérin-Lajoie, Walter Adame-Gonzalez, Eve-Marie Frigon, Liana Guerra Sanches, Anna Nayouf, Denis Boire, Mahsa Dadar, Josefina Maranzano","doi":"10.1002/mrm.70083","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>The volume of in vivo human brains is determined with various MRI measurement tools that have not been assessed against a gold standard. The purpose of this study was to validate the MRI brain volumes by scanning ex vivo, in situ specimens, which allows the extraction of the brain after the scan to compare its volume with the gold-standard water displacement method (WDM).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The 3T MRI T<sub>2</sub>-weighted, T<sub>1</sub>-weighted, and MP2RAGE images of seven anatomical heads fixed with an alcohol-formaldehyde solution were acquired. The gray and white matter were assessed using two methods: (i) a manual intensity-based threshold segmentation using Display (MINC-ToolKit) and (ii) an automatic deep learning-based segmentation tool (SynthSeg). The brains were extracted and their volumes measured with the WDM after the removal of their meninges and a midsagittal cut. Volumes from all methods were compared with the ground truth (WDM volumes) using a repeated-measures analysis of variance.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Mean brain volumes, in cubic centimeters, were 1111.14 ± 121.78 for WDM, 1020.29 ± 70.01 for manual T<sub>2</sub>-weighted, 1056.29 ± 90.54 for automatic T<sub>2</sub>-weighted, 1094.69 ± 100.51 for automatic T<sub>1</sub>-weighted, 1066.56 ± 96.52 for automatic magnetization-prepared 2 rapid gradient-echo first inversion time, and 1156.18 ± 121.87 for automatic magnetization-prepared 2 rapid gradient-echo second inversion time. All volumetry methods were significantly different (F = 17.874; p < 0.001) from the WDM volumes, except the automatic T<sub>1</sub>-weighted volumes.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>SynthSeg accurately determined the brain volume in ex vivo, in situ T<sub>1</sub>-weighted MRI scans. The results suggested that given the contrast similarity between the ex vivo and in vivo sequences, the brain volumes of clinical studies are most probably sufficiently accurate, with some degree of underestimation depending on the sequence used.</p>","PeriodicalId":18065,"journal":{"name":"Magnetic Resonance in Medicine","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Ex vivo human brain volumetry: Validation of MRI measurements.\",\"authors\":\"Amy Gérin-Lajoie, Walter Adame-Gonzalez, Eve-Marie Frigon, Liana Guerra Sanches, Anna Nayouf, Denis Boire, Mahsa Dadar, Josefina Maranzano\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/mrm.70083\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>The volume of in vivo human brains is determined with various MRI measurement tools that have not been assessed against a gold standard. The purpose of this study was to validate the MRI brain volumes by scanning ex vivo, in situ specimens, which allows the extraction of the brain after the scan to compare its volume with the gold-standard water displacement method (WDM).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The 3T MRI T<sub>2</sub>-weighted, T<sub>1</sub>-weighted, and MP2RAGE images of seven anatomical heads fixed with an alcohol-formaldehyde solution were acquired. The gray and white matter were assessed using two methods: (i) a manual intensity-based threshold segmentation using Display (MINC-ToolKit) and (ii) an automatic deep learning-based segmentation tool (SynthSeg). The brains were extracted and their volumes measured with the WDM after the removal of their meninges and a midsagittal cut. Volumes from all methods were compared with the ground truth (WDM volumes) using a repeated-measures analysis of variance.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Mean brain volumes, in cubic centimeters, were 1111.14 ± 121.78 for WDM, 1020.29 ± 70.01 for manual T<sub>2</sub>-weighted, 1056.29 ± 90.54 for automatic T<sub>2</sub>-weighted, 1094.69 ± 100.51 for automatic T<sub>1</sub>-weighted, 1066.56 ± 96.52 for automatic magnetization-prepared 2 rapid gradient-echo first inversion time, and 1156.18 ± 121.87 for automatic magnetization-prepared 2 rapid gradient-echo second inversion time. All volumetry methods were significantly different (F = 17.874; p < 0.001) from the WDM volumes, except the automatic T<sub>1</sub>-weighted volumes.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>SynthSeg accurately determined the brain volume in ex vivo, in situ T<sub>1</sub>-weighted MRI scans. The results suggested that given the contrast similarity between the ex vivo and in vivo sequences, the brain volumes of clinical studies are most probably sufficiently accurate, with some degree of underestimation depending on the sequence used.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":18065,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Magnetic Resonance in Medicine\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-09-12\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Magnetic Resonance in Medicine\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1002/mrm.70083\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Magnetic Resonance in Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/mrm.70083","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
目的:体内人类大脑的体积是用各种MRI测量工具确定的,这些工具尚未根据金标准进行评估。本研究的目的是通过扫描离体原位标本来验证MRI脑体积,这允许在扫描后提取脑,并将其体积与金标准水置换法(WDM)进行比较。方法:获取7个解剖头颅经醇甲醛溶液固定后的3T MRI t2加权、t1加权和MP2RAGE图像。使用两种方法评估灰质和白质:(i)使用Display (MINC-ToolKit)手动基于强度的阈值分割(ii)基于深度学习的自动分割工具(SynthSeg)。在切除脑膜和正中矢状切口后,提取大脑并用WDM测量其体积。使用重复测量方差分析,将所有方法的体积与地面真实(WDM体积)进行比较。结果:WDM组平均脑容量(立方厘米)为1111.14±121.78,手动t2加权组为1020.29±70.01,自动t2加权组为1056.29±90.54,自动t1加权组为1094.69±100.51,自动磁化制备2次快速梯度回波第一次反演时间为1066.56±96.52,自动磁化制备2次快速梯度回波第二次反演时间为1156.18±121.87。所有容积法测定结果差异均有统计学意义(F = 17.874; p - 1加权容积)。结论:SynthSeg在离体、原位t1加权MRI扫描中准确测定了脑容量。结果表明,考虑到离体和体内序列之间的对比相似性,临床研究的脑容量很可能足够准确,根据所使用的序列有一定程度的低估。
Ex vivo human brain volumetry: Validation of MRI measurements.
Purpose: The volume of in vivo human brains is determined with various MRI measurement tools that have not been assessed against a gold standard. The purpose of this study was to validate the MRI brain volumes by scanning ex vivo, in situ specimens, which allows the extraction of the brain after the scan to compare its volume with the gold-standard water displacement method (WDM).
Methods: The 3T MRI T2-weighted, T1-weighted, and MP2RAGE images of seven anatomical heads fixed with an alcohol-formaldehyde solution were acquired. The gray and white matter were assessed using two methods: (i) a manual intensity-based threshold segmentation using Display (MINC-ToolKit) and (ii) an automatic deep learning-based segmentation tool (SynthSeg). The brains were extracted and their volumes measured with the WDM after the removal of their meninges and a midsagittal cut. Volumes from all methods were compared with the ground truth (WDM volumes) using a repeated-measures analysis of variance.
Results: Mean brain volumes, in cubic centimeters, were 1111.14 ± 121.78 for WDM, 1020.29 ± 70.01 for manual T2-weighted, 1056.29 ± 90.54 for automatic T2-weighted, 1094.69 ± 100.51 for automatic T1-weighted, 1066.56 ± 96.52 for automatic magnetization-prepared 2 rapid gradient-echo first inversion time, and 1156.18 ± 121.87 for automatic magnetization-prepared 2 rapid gradient-echo second inversion time. All volumetry methods were significantly different (F = 17.874; p < 0.001) from the WDM volumes, except the automatic T1-weighted volumes.
Conclusion: SynthSeg accurately determined the brain volume in ex vivo, in situ T1-weighted MRI scans. The results suggested that given the contrast similarity between the ex vivo and in vivo sequences, the brain volumes of clinical studies are most probably sufficiently accurate, with some degree of underestimation depending on the sequence used.
期刊介绍:
Magnetic Resonance in Medicine (Magn Reson Med) is an international journal devoted to the publication of original investigations concerned with all aspects of the development and use of nuclear magnetic resonance and electron paramagnetic resonance techniques for medical applications. Reports of original investigations in the areas of mathematics, computing, engineering, physics, biophysics, chemistry, biochemistry, and physiology directly relevant to magnetic resonance will be accepted, as well as methodology-oriented clinical studies.